Chapter II: Progress of Wood Engraving (2)

It is surprising that the Rev. Mr. Horne, who is no incurious observer of books, but an author who has written largely on Bibliography, should not have carefully copied so remarkable a date, or communicated it to a friend, when it might have been confirmed by a careful examination of the binding; and still more surprising is it that such binding should have been destroyed. From the very fact of his not having paid more particular attention to this most important date, and from his having permitted the evidence of it to be destroyed, the Rev. Mr. Horne seems to be an incompetent witness. Who would think of calling a person to prove from recollection the date of an old and important deed, who, when he had it in his possession, was so little aware of its value as to throw it away? The three books in question, when covered by such a binding, would surely be much greater than when bound in any other manner. Such a volume must have been unique; and, if the date on the binding were correct, it must have been admitted as decisive of a fact interesting to every bibliographer in Europe. It is not even mentioned in what kind of numerals the date was expressed, whether in Roman or Arabic. If the numerals had been Arabic, we might very reasonably suppose that the Rev. Mr. Horne had mistaken a seven for a two, and that, instead of “142 odd,” the correct date was “147 odd.” In Arabic numerals, such as were used about the middle of the fifteenth century, the seven may very easily be mistaken for a two.

The earliest ancient binding known, on which a date is impressed, is, I believe, that described by Laire.[II-32] It is that of a copy of “Sancti Hieronymi Epistolæ;” and the words, in the same manner as that of the binding of which the Rev. Mr. Horne had so accurate a recollection, were “stamped at the extremity of the binding, towards the edge of the squares.” It is only necessary to cite the words impressed on one of the boards, which were as follows:

“Illigatus est Anno Domini 1469
Per me Johannem
Richenbach Capellanum
In Gyslingen.”[II-33]

[Footnote II-32: Index Librorum ab inventa Typographia ad annum
1500, No. 37.]

[Footnote II-33: Mr. Bohn is in possession of a similarly bound
volume, namely, “Astexani de Ast, Scrutinium Scripturarum,”
printed by Mentelin, without date, but about 1468, on the pig-skin
covers of which is printed in bold black letter, _Per me
Rich-en-bach illigatus in Gysslingen 1470_.]

The numerals of the date it is to be observed were Arabic. In the library of Dr. Kloss of Frankfort, sold in London by Sotheby and Son in 1835, were two volumes, “St. Augustini de Civitat. Dei, Libri xxii. 1469,” and “St. Augustini Confessiones” of the same date; both of which were bound by “Johannes Capellanus in Gyslingen,” and who in the same manner had impressed his name on the covers with the date 1470. Both volumes had belonged to “Dominus Georgius Ruch de Gamundia.”[II-34] That the volume formerly in the Rev. Mr. Horne’s possession was bound by the curate of Geisslingen I by no means pretend to say, though I am firmly of opinion that it was bound subsequent to 1470, and that the character which he supposed to be a two was in reality a different figure. It is worthy of remark that it appears to have been bound by the “Plebanus” of some church, a word which is nearly synonymous with “Capellanus.”[II-35]

[Footnote II-34: “Catalogue of the Library of Dr. Kloss of
Frankfort,” Nos. 460 and 468. Geisslingen is about fifteen miles
north-west of Ulm in Suabia, and Gemund about twelve miles
northward of Geisslingen.]

[Footnote II-35: Mr. Singer, at page 101 of his Researches into
the History of Playing-cards, speaks of “_one_ Plebanus of
Augsburg,” as if Plebanus were a proper name. It has nearly the
same meaning as our own word “Curate.” “PLEBANUS, Parœcus, Curio,
Sacerdos, qui _plebi_ præest; Italis, _Piovano_; Gallo-Belgis,
_Pleban_. Balbus in Catholico: ‘Plebanus, dominus plebis,
Presbyter, qui plebem regit.’--Plebanum vero maxime vocant in
ecclesiis cathedralibus seu collegiatis canonicum, cui plebis
earum jurisdictioni subditæ cura committitur.”--Du Cange,
Glossarium, in verbo “Plebanus.”]

As it does not come within the plan of the present volume to give a catalogue of all the subjects contained in the block-books to which it may be necessary to refer as illustrating the progress of wood engraving, I shall confine myself to a general notice of the manner in which the cuts are executed, with occasional observations on the designs, and such remarks as may be likely to explain any peculiarity of appearance, or to enable the reader to form a distinct idea of the subject referred to.

At whatever period the Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, and the Biblia Pauperum may have been executed, the former has the appearance of being the earliest; and in the absence of everything like proof upon the point, and as the style in which it is engraved is certainly more simple than that of the other two, it seems entitled to be first noticed in tracing the progress of the art.

Of the Apocalypse,--or “Historia Sancti Johannis Evangelistæ ejusque Visiones Apocalypticæ,” as it is mostly termed by bibliographers, for the book itself has no title,--Heineken mentions no less than six editions, the earliest of which he considers to be that described by him at page 367 of his “Idée Générale d’une Collection complète d’Estampes.” He, however, declares that the marks by which he has assigned to each edition its comparative antiquity are not infallible. It is indeed very evident that the marks which he assumed as characteristic of the relative order of the different editions were merely arbitrary, and could by no means be admitted as of the slightest consequence in enabling any person to form a correct opinion on the subject. He notices two editions as the first and second, and immediately after he mentions a circumstance which might almost entitle the third to take precedence of them both; and that which he saw last he thinks the oldest of all. The designs of the second edition described by him, he says, are by another master than those of the first, although the artist has adhered to the same subjects and the same ideas. The third, according to his observations, differs from the first and second, both in the subjects and the descriptive text. The fourth edition is from the same blocks as the third; the only difference between them being, that the fourth is without the letters in alphabetical order which indicate the succession of the cuts. The fifth differed from the third or fourth only in the text and the directing letters, as the designs were the same; the only variations that could be observed being extremely trifling. After having described five editions of the book, he decides that a sixth, which he saw after the others, ought to be considered the earliest of all.[II-36] In all the copies which he had seen, the impressions had been taken by means of a rubber, in such a manner that each leaf contained only one engraving; the other side, which commonly bore the marks of the rubber, being without a cut. The impressions when collected into a volume faced each other, so that the first and last pages were blank.

[Footnote II-36: Idée Générale, pp. 334-370.]

The edition of the Apocalypse to which I shall now refer is that described by Heineken, at page 364, as the fifth; and the copy is that mentioned by him, at page 367, as then being in the collection of M. de Gaignat, and as wanting two cuts, Nos. 36 and 37. It is at present in the King’s Library at the British Museum.

It is a thin folio in modern red morocco binding, and has, when perfect, consisted of fifty wood engravings, with their explanatory text also cut in wood, generally within an oblong border of a single line, within the _field_ of the engraving, and not added underneath, as in the Speculum Salvationis, nor in detached compartments, both above and below, as in the Biblia Pauperum. The paper, which is somewhat of a cream colour, is stout, with rather a coarse surface, and such as we find the most ancient books printed on. As each leaf has been pasted down on another of modern paper, in order to preserve it, the marks of the rubber at the back of each impression, as described by Heineken, cannot be seen. The annexed outline is a reduced copy of a paper-mark, which may be perceived on some of the leaves. It is very like that numbered “vii.” at p. 224, vol. i. of Mr. Ottley’s Inquiry, and which he says occurs in the edition called the first Latin of the Speculum Salvationis. It is nearly the same as that which is to be seen in Earl Spencer’s “Historia Virginis;” and Santander states that he has noticed a similar mark in books printed at Cologne by Ulric Zell, and Bart. de Unkel; at Louvain by John Veldener and Conrad Braen; and in books printed at Utrecht by Nic. Ketelaer and Gerard de Leempt.

The size of the largest cuts, as defined by the plain lines which form the border, is about ten and five-eighths inches high, by seven and six-eighths inches wide; of the smallest, ten and two-eighths inches high, by seven and three-eighths wide.[II-37] The order in which they are to be placed in binding is indicated by a letter of the alphabet, which serves the same purpose as our modern signatures,--engraved in a conspicuous part of the cut. For instance, the first two, which, as well as the others, might either face each other or be pasted back to back, are each marked with the letter +a+; the two next with the letter +b+, and so on through the alphabet. As the alphabet--which has the i the same as the j, the v the same as the u, and has not the w--became exhausted at the forty-sixth cut, the forty-seventh and forty-eighth are marked with a character which was used to represent the words “et cetera;” and the forty-ninth and fiftieth with the terminal abbreviation of the letters “us.” In the copy described by Heineken, he observed that the directing letters +m+ and +n+ were wanting in the twenty-fourth and twenty-sixth cuts, and in the copy under consideration they are also omitted. The m, however, appears to have been engraved, though for some reason or other not to have been inked in taking an impression; for on a careful examination of this cut,--without being aware at the time of Heineken having noticed the omission,--I thought that I could very plainly discern the indention of the letter above one of the angels in the upper compartment of the print.

[Footnote II-37: In the copy of the Biblia Pauperum in the British
Museum,
Inches. Inches.
The largest cut is 10-4/8 high, and 7-5/8 wide.
The smallest -- 10-1/8 -- -- 7-5/8 --

In the Historia Virginis, also in the British Museum,
The largest cut is 10-3/8 high, and 7-2/8 wide.
The smallest -- 9-7/8 -- -- 6-7/8 --]

Of the forty-eight cuts[II-38] contained in the Museum copy, the greater number are divided by a horizontal line, nearly in the middle, and thus each consists of two compartments; of the remainder, each is occupied by a single subject, which fills the whole page. In some, the explanatory text consists only of two or three lines; and in others it occupies so large a space, that if it were set up in moderately sized type, it would be sufficient to fill a duodecimo page. The characters are different from those in the History of the Virgin and the Biblia Pauperum, and are smaller than those of the former, and generally larger and more distinctly cut than those of the latter; and although, as well as in the two last-named books, the words are much abbreviated, yet they are more easy to be made out than the text of either of the others. The impressions on the whole are better taken than those of the Biblia Pauperum, though in lighter-coloured ink, something like a greyish sepia, and apparently of a thinner body. It does not appear to have contained any oil, and is more like distemper or water-colour than printer’s ink. From the manner in which the lines are indented in the paper, in several of the cuts, it is evident that they must either have been subjected to a considerable degree of pressure or have been very hard rubbed.

[Footnote II-38: The two which are wanting are those numbered 36
and 37--that is, the second +s+, and the first +t+--in Heineken’s
collation. Although there is a memorandum at the commencement of
the book that those cuts are wanting, yet the person who has put
in the numbers, in manuscript, at the foot of each, has not
noticed the omission, but has continued the numbers consecutively,
marking that 36 which in a perfect copy is 38, and so on to the
rest. A reference to Heineken from those manuscript numbers
subsequent to the thirty-fifth cut would lead to error.]

Although some of the figures bear a considerable degree of likeness to others of the same kind in the Biblia Pauperum, I cannot think that the designs for both books were made by the same person. The figures in the different works which most resemble each other are those of saints and angels, whose form and expression have been represented according to a conventional standard, to which most of the artists of the period conformed, in the same manner as in representing the Almighty and Christ, whether they were painters, glass-stainers, carvers, or wood-engravers. In many of the figures the drapery is broken into easy and natural folds by means of single lines; and if this were admitted as a ground for assigning the cut of the Annunciation to Italy, with much greater reason might the Apocalypse be ascribed to the same country.

Without venturing to give an opinion whether the cuts were engraved in Germany, Holland, or in the Low Countries, the drawing of many of the figures appears to correspond with the idea that I have formed of the style of Greek art, such as it was in the early part of the fifteenth century. St. John was the favourite apostle of the Greeks, as St. Peter was of the church of Rome; and as the Revelations were more especially addressed to the churches of Greece, they were more generally read in that country than in Western Europe. Artists mostly copy, in the heads which they draw, the general expression of the country[II-39] to which they belong, and where they have received their first impressions; and in the Apocalypse the character of several of the heads appears to be decidedly Grecian. The general representation, too, of several visions would seem to have been suggested by a Greek who was familiar with that portion of the New Testament which was so generally perused in his native land, and whose annunciations and figurative prophecies were, in the early part of the fifteenth century, commonly supposed by his countrymen to relate to the Turks, who at that time were triumphing over the cross. With them Mahomet was the Antichrist of the Revelations, and his followers the people bearing the mark of the beast, who were to persecute, and for a time to hold in bondage, the members of the church of Christ. As many Greeks, both artists and scholars, were driven from their country by the oppression of the Turks several years before the taking of Constantinople in 1453, I am induced to think that to a Greek we owe the designs of this edition of the Apocalypse. In the lower division of the twenty-third cut, _m_, representing the fight of Michael and his angels with the dragon, the following shields are borne by two of the heavenly host.

[Footnote II-39: Witness Rembrandt, who never gets rid of the
Dutch character, no matter how elevated his subject may be.]

The crescent, as is well known, was one of the badges of Constantinople long previous to its capture by the Turks. The sort of cross in the other shield is very like that in the arms of the knights of St. Constantine, a military order which is said to have been founded at Constantinople by the Emperor Isaac Angelus Comnenus, in 1190. The above coincidences, though trifling, tend to support the opinion that the designs were made by a Greek artist. It is, however, possible, that the badges on the shields may have been suggested by the mere fancy of the designer, and that they may equally resemble the heraldic bearings of some order or of some individuals of Western Europe.

Though some of the designs are very indifferent, yet there are others which display considerable ability, and several of the single figures are decidedly superior to any that are contained in the other block-books. They are drawn with greater vigour and feeling; and though the designs of the Biblia Pauperum show a greater knowledge of the mechanism of art, yet the best of them, in point of expression and emphatic marking of character, are inferior to the best in the Apocalypse.

With respect to the engraving, the cuts are executed in the simplest manner, as there is not the least attempt at shading, by means of cross lines or hatchings, to be perceived in any one of the designs. The most difficult part of the engraver’s task, supposing the drawings to have been made by another person, would be the cutting of the letters, which in several of the subjects must have occupied a considerable portion of time, and have required no small degree of care. The following is a reduced copy of the first cut.

In the upper portion of the subject, St. John is seen addressing four persons, three men and a woman; and the text at the top informs us of the success of his ministry: “_Conversi ab idolis, per predicationem beati Johannis, Drusiana et ceteri._”--“By the preaching of St. John, Drusiana and others are withdrawn from their idols.” The letter +a+, a little above the saint’s outstretched hand, indicates that the cut is the first of the series. In the lower compartment St. John is seen baptizing Drusiana, who, as she stands naked in the font, is of very small size compared with the saint. The situation in which Drusiana is placed might be alleged in support of their peculiar tenets, either by the Baptists, who advocate immersion as the proper mode of administering the rite, or by those who consider sprinkling as sufficient; but in each case with a difficulty which it would not be easy to explain: for if Drusiana were to be baptized by immersion, the font is too small to allow her to be dipped overhead; and if the rite were to be administered by mere sprinkling, why is she standing naked in the font? To the right of the cut are several figures, two of whom are provided with axes, who seem wishful to break open the door of the chapel in which St. John and his proselyte are seen. The inscription above their heads lets us know that they are--“_Cultores ydolorum explorantes facta ejus_;”-- “Worshippers of idols watching the saint’s proceedings.”

The following cut is a copy of the eighteenth of the Apocalypse, which is illustrative of the XIth and XIIIth chapters of Revelations. The upper portion represents the execution of the two witnesses of the Lord, who are in the tablet named Enoch and Helyas, by the command of the beast which ascendeth out of the bottomless pit, and which is Antichrist. He is seen issuing his commands for the execution of the witnesses; and the face of the executioner who has just used his sword, and who is looking towards him with an expression of brutal exultation, might have served Albert Durer for that of the mocker in his cut of Christ crowned with thorns.

The inscription to the right, is the 7th verse of the XIth chapter, with the names of Enoch and Helyas inserted as those of the two witnesses: “_Cum finierunt Enoch et Helyas testimonium suum, bestia quæ ascendit de abisso faciet contra eos bellum, et vincet eos et occidet illos_.” In our translation the verse is rendered thus: “And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them and kill them.”

The tablet to the left contains the following inscription: “_Et jacebunt corpora eorum in plateis, et non sinent poni in monumentis_.” It is formed of two passages, in the 8th and 9th verses of the XIth chapter of Revelations, which are thus rendered in our version of the Bible: “And their dead bodies shall lie in the street, . . . and they of the people . . . shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.”

In the lower compartment Antichrist is seen working his miracles, uprooting the two olive trees, typical of the two witnesses whom he had caused to be slain.[II-40] Two of his followers are seen kneeling as if worshipping him, while more to the left are the supporters of the true faith delivered into the hands of executioners. The design is illustrative of the XIIIth chapter of Revelations. The following is the inscription above the figure of Antichrist:--“_Hic facit Antichristus miracula sua, et credentes in ipsum honorat, et incredentes variis interficit pœnis_.”--“Here Antichrist is performing his miracles, honouring those who believe in him, and putting the incredulous to death by various punishments.” The leaves of the trees which Antichrist has miraculously uprooted are extremely like those of the tree of life engraved in one of the cuts of the Biblia Pauperum, and of which a copy will be found in a subsequent page.

[Footnote II-40: Revelations, chap. xi. verses 3d and 4th.]

In several of the cuts, the typical expressions which occur in the texts are explained. Thus, in cut eighth, we are informed that “_Stolæ albæ animarum gloriam designant_.”--“The white vestments denote the glory of departed souls.” In the lower compartment of the same cut, the “_cæli recessio_”--“the opening of the heavens”--is explained to be the communication of the Bible to the Gentiles. In the lower compartment of the ninth cut, “much incense” is said to signify the precepts of the Gospel; the “censers,” the hearts of the Apostles; and the “golden altar,” the Church.

The next block-book which demands notice is that named “Historia seu Providentia Virginis Mariæ, ex Cantico Canticorum:” that is, “The History or Prefiguration of the Virgin Mary, from the Song of Songs.” It is of small-folio size, and consists of sixteen leaves, printed on one side only by means of friction; and the ink is of a dark brown, approaching nearly to black. Each impressed page contains two subjects, one above the other; the total number of subjects in the book is, consequently, thirty-two.

Of this book, according to the observations of Heineken, there are two editions; which, from variations noticed by him in the explanatory text, are evidently from different blocks; but, as the designs are precisely the same, it is certain that the one has been copied from the other.[II-41] That which he considers to be the first edition, has, in his opinion, been engraved in Germany; the other, he thinks, was a copy of the original, executed by some engraver in Holland. The principal ground on which he determines the priority of the editions is, that in the one the text is much more correctly given than in the other; and he thence concludes that the most correct would be the second. In this opinion I concur; not that his rule will universally hold good, but that in this case the conclusion which he has drawn seems the most probable. The designs, it is admitted, are precisely the same; and as the cuts of the one would in all probability be engraved from tracings or transfers of the other, it is not likely that we should find such a difference in the text of the two editions if that of the first were correct. A wood-engraver--on this point I speak from experience--would be much more likely to commit literal errors in copying manuscript, than to deviate in cutting a fac-simile from a correct impression. Had the text of the first edition been correct,--considering that the designs of the one edition are exact copies of those of the other,--it is probable that the text of both would have been more nearly alike. But as there are several errors in the text of the first edition, it is most likely that many of them would be discovered and corrected by the person at whose instance the designs were copied for the second. Diametrically opposite to this conclusion is that of Mr. Ottley, who argues as follows:[II-42] “Heineken endeavours to draw another argument in favour of the originality of the edition possessed by Pertusati, Verdussen, and the Bodleian library, from the various errors, in that edition, in the Latin inscriptions on the scrolls; which, he says, are corrected in the other edition. But it is evident that this circumstance makes in favour of an opposite conclusion. The artist who originally invented the work must have been well acquainted with Latin, since it is, in fact, no other than an union of many of the most beautiful verses of the Book of Canticles, with a series of designs illustrative of the divine mysteries supposed to be revealed in that sacred poem; and, consequently, we have reason to consider that edition the original in which the inscriptions are given with the most correctness; and to ascribe the gross blunders in the other to the ignorance of some ordinary wood-engraver by whom the work was copied.” Even granting the assumption that the engraver of the edition, supposed by Mr. Ottley to be the first, was well acquainted with Latin, and that he who engraved the presumed second did not understand a word of that language, yet it by no means follows that the latter could not make a correct tracing of the engraved text lying before him. Because a draughtsman is unacquainted with a language, it would certainly be most erroneous to infer that he would be incapable of copying the characters correctly. Besides, though it does not benefit his argument a whit, it is surely assuming too much to assert that the artist who made the designs also selected the texts, and that he _must_ have been well acquainted with Latin; and that he who executed Mr. Ottley’s presumed second edition was some ignorant ordinary wood-engraver. Did the artists who executed the fac-similes in Mr. Ottley’s work, or in Dr. Dibdin’s “Bibliotheca Spenceriana,” understand the abbreviated Latin which in many instances they had to engrave; and did they in consequence of their ignorance of that language copy incorrectly the original texts and sentences which were before them?

[Footnote II-41: Idée Générale, p. 376.]

[Footnote II-42: Inquiry, vol. i. p. 140.]

In a copy which Heineken considers to be of the second edition, belonging to the city of Harlem, that writer observed the following inscription, from a wood block, impressed, as I understand him, at the top of the first cut. “+Dit is die voersinicheit va Marie der mod . godes . en is gehete in lath+ . _Cāti._” This inscription--which Heineken says is “en langue Flamande, ou plûtôt en Plât-Alemand”--may be expressed in English as follows: “This is the prefiguration of Mary the mother of God, and is in Latin named the Canticles.” Heineken expresses no doubt of this inscription being genuine, though he makes use of it as an argument in support of his opinion, that the copy in which it occurs was one of later edition; “for it is well known,” he observes, “that the earliest editions of printed books are without titles, and more especially those of block-books.” As this inscription, however, has been found in the Harlem copy only, I am inclined to agree with Mr. Ottley in considering it as a silly fraud devised by some of the compatriots of Coster for the purpose of establishing a fact which it is, in reality, much better calculated to overthrow.[II-43]

[Footnote II-43: Inquiry, p. 140.]

Heineken, who appears to have had more knowledge than taste on the subject of art, declares the History of the Virgin to be “the most Gothic of all the block-books; that it is different from them both in the style of the designs and of the engraving; and that the figures are very like the ancient sculptures in the churches of Germany.” If by the term “Gothic” he means rude and tasteless, I differ with him entirely; for, though there be great sameness in the subjects, yet the figures, generally, are more gracefully designed than those of any other block-book that I have seen. Compared with them, those of the Biblia Pauperum and the Speculum might be termed “Gothic” indeed.

The above group,--from that which Heineken considers the first edition,--in which the figures are of the size of the originals, is taken from the seventh subject in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration;[II-44] that is, from the upper portion of the fourth cut.

[Footnote II-44: Inquiry, p. 144, vol. i.]

The text is the 14th verse of the 1st chapter of the Song of Solomon: “_Botrus cipri dilectus meus inter vineas enngadi_;” which in our Bible is translated: “My beloved is unto me as a cluster of camphire in the vineyards of En-gedi.” In every cut the female figures are almost precisely the same, and the drapery and the expression scarcely vary. From the easy and graceful attitudes of his female figures, as well as from the manner in which they are clothed, the artist may be considered as the Stothard of his day.

The two preceding subjects are impressed on the second leaf, in the order in which they are here represented, forming Nos. 3 and 4 in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration. They are reduced copies from the originals in the first edition, and afford a correct idea of a complete page.[II-45]

[Footnote II-45: The copy from which the preceding specimens are
given was formerly the property of the Rev. C. M. Cracherode, by
whom it was left, with the rest of his valuable collection of
books, to the British Museum.]

On the scroll to the left, in the upper subject, the words are intended for--“_Trahe me, post te curremus in odore unguentorum tuorum_.” They are to be found in the 4th and 3rd verses of the 1st chapter of the Song of Solomon. In our Bible the phrases are translated as follows: “Draw me, we will run after thee, . . . [in] the savour of thy good ointments.” In the scroll to the right, the inscription is from the 14th verse of the IInd chapter: “_Sonet vox tua in auribus meis, vox enim tua dulcis et facies tua decora_:” which is thus rendered in our Bible: “Let me hear thy voice, for sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is comely.”

On the scroll to the left, in the lower compartment, is the following inscription, from verse 10th, chapter IInd: “_En dilectus meus loquitur mihi, Surge, propera, amica mea_:” in our Bible translated thus: “My beloved spake, and said unto me, Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away.” The inscription on the scroll to the right is from 1st verse of chapter IVth: “_Quam pulchra es amica mea, quam pulchra es! Oculi tui columbarum, absque eo quod intrinsecus latet._” The translation of this passage in our Bible does not correspond with that of the Vulgate in the last clause: “Behold thou art fair, my love; behold thou art fair; thou hast doves’ eyes _within thy locks_.”

The style in which the cuts of the History of the Virgin are engraved indicates a more advanced state of art than those in the Apocalypse. The field of each cut is altogether better filled, and the subjects contain more of what an engraver would term “work;” and shadowing, which is represented by courses of single lines, is also introduced. The back-grounds are better put in, and throughout the whole book may be observed several indications of a perception of natural beauty; such as the occasional introduction of trees, flowers, and animals. A vine-stock, with its trellis, is happily and tastefully introduced at folio 4 and folio 10; and at folio 12 a goat and two sheep, drawn and engraved with considerable ability, are perceived in the background. Several other instances of a similar kind might be pointed out as proofs that the artist, whoever he might be, was no unworthy precursor of Albert Durer.

From a fancied delicacy in the engraving of the cuts of the History of the Virgin, Dr. Dibdin was led to conjecture that they were the “production of some metallic substance, and not struck off from wooden blocks.”[II-46] This speculation is the result of a total ignorance of the practical part of wood engraving, and of the capabilities of the art; and the very process which is suggested involves a greater difficulty than that which is sought to be removed. But, in fact, so far from the engravings being executed with a delicacy unattainable on wood, there is nothing in them--so far as the mere cutting of fancied delicate lines is concerned--which a mere apprentice of the present day, using very ordinary tools, would not execute as well, either on pear-tree, apple-tree, or beech, the kinds of wood on which the earliest engravings are supposed to have been made. Working on box, there is scarcely a line in all the series which a skilful wood-engraver could not split. In a similar manner Mr. John Landseer conjectured from the frequent occurrence of cross-hatching in the wood engravings of the sixteenth century, that they, instead of being cut on wood, had in reality been executed on type-metal; although, as is known to every wood-engraver, the execution of such hatchings on type-metal would be more difficult than on wood. When, in refutation of his opinion, he was shown impressions from such presumed blocks or plates of type-metal, which from certain marks in the impressions had been evidently worm-eaten, he--in the genuine style of an “ingenious disputant” who could

“Confute the exciseman and puzzle the vicar,--”

abandoned type-metal, and fortified his “_stubborn_ opinion behind _vegetable putties_ or pastes that are capable of being hardened--or any substance that is capable of being _worm-eaten_.”[II-47] Such “commenta opinionum”--the mere figments of conjecture--only deserve notice in consequence of their extravagance.

[Footnote II-46: Bibliotheca Spenceriana, vol. i. p. 36. Mr.
Ottley cites the passage at p. 139, vol i. of his Inquiry, for the
purpose of expressing his dissent from the theory.]

[Footnote II-47: Landseer’s Lectures on the Art of Engraving, pp.
201-205, 8vo. London, 1807.]

The History of the Virgin, in the same manner as every other ancient block-book, has been claimed for Coster by those who ascribe to him the invention both of wood engraving and printing with moveable types; but if even the churchwarden of St. Bavon’s in Harlem ever had handled a graver, or made a design, or if he was even the cause of wood-cuts being engraved by others,--every one of which assertions I very much doubt,--I should yet feel strongly inclined to believe that the work in question was the production of an artist residing either in Suabia or Alsace.

Scarcely any person who has had an opportunity of examining the works of Martin Schön, or Schöngauer,--one of the earliest German copper-plate engravers,--who is said to have died in 1486, can fail, on looking over the designs in the History of the Virgin, to notice the resemblance which many of his female figures bear to those in the above-named work. The similarity is too striking to have been accidental. I am inclined to believe that Martin Schön must have studied--and diligently too--the subjects contained in the History, or that he had received his professional education in a school which might possibly be founded by the artist who designed and engraved the wood-cuts in question, or under a master who had thoroughly adopted their style.

Martin Schön was a native of Colmar in Alsace, where he was born about 1453, but was a descendant of a family, probably of artists, which originally belonged to Augsburg. Heineken and Von Murr both bear testimony,[II-48] though indirectly, to the resemblance which his works bear to the designs in the History of the Virgin. The former states that the figures in the History are very like the ancient sculptures in the churches of Germany, and Von Murr asserts that such sculptures were probably Martin Schön’s models.

[Footnote II-48: Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 374. Von Murr,
Journal, 2 Theil, S. 43.]

In two or three of the designs in the History of the Virgin several shields of arms are introduced, either borne by figures, or suspended from a wall. As the heraldic emblems on such shields were not likely to be entirely suggested by the mere fancy of the artist, I think that most of them will be found to belong to Germany rather than to Holland; and the charge on one of them,--two fish back to back, which is rather remarkable, and by no means common, is one of the quarterings of the former Counts of Wirtemberg, the very district in which I am inclined to think the work was executed. I moreover fancy that in one of the cuts I can perceive an allusion to the Council of Basle, which in 1439 elected Amadeus of Savoy as Pope, under the title of Felix V, in opposition to Eugene IV. In order to afford those who are better acquainted with the subject an opportunity of judging for themselves, and of making further discoveries which may support my opinions if well-founded, or which may correct them if erroneous, I shall give copies of all the shields of arms which occur in the book. The following cut of four figures--a pope, two cardinals, and a bishop--occurs in the upper compartment of the nineteenth folio. The shield charged with a black eagle also occurs in the same compartment.

The preceding figures are seen looking over the battlements of a house in which the Virgin, typical of the Church, is seen in bed. On a scroll is inscribed the following sentence, from the Song of Solomon, chap. iii. v. 2: “_Surgam et circumibo civitatem; per vicos et plateas queram quem diligit anima mea_:” which is thus translated in our Bible: “I will rise now, and go about the city in the streets, and in the broad ways I will seek him whom my soul loveth.” In the same design, the Virgin, with her three attendants, are seen in a street, where two men on horseback appear taking away her mantle. One of the men bears upon his shield the figure of a black eagle, the same as that which appears underneath the wood-cut above given. Upon a scroll is this inscription, from Solomon’s Song, chapter V. verse 7: “_Percusserunt et vulneraverunt me, tulerunt pallium meum custodes murorum_.” In our Bible the entire verse is thus translated: “The watchmen that went about the city found me; they smote me, they wounded me: the keepers of the walls took away my veil from me.”

As the incidents in the life of the Virgin, described in the Canticles, were assumed by commentators to be typical of the history of the Church, I am inclined to think that the above cut may contain an allusion to the disputes between Pope Eugene IV. and the Council assembled at Basle in 1439. The passage in the first inscription, “I will seek him whom my soul loveth,” might be very appropriately applied to a council which professed to represent the Church, and which had chosen for itself a new head. The second inscription would be equally descriptive of the treatment which, in the opinion of the same council, the Church had received from Eugene IV, whom they declared to be deposed, because “he was a disturber of the peace and union of the Church; a schismatic and a heretic; guilty of simony; perjured and incorrigible.” On the shield borne by the figure of a pope wearing a triple crown, is a fleur-de-lis; but whether or no this flower formed part of the armorial distinctions of Amadeus Duke of Savoy, whom the council chose for their new pope, I have not been able to ascertain. The lion borne by the second figure, a cardinal, is too general a cognizance to be assigned to any particular state or city. The charge on the shield borne by the third figure, also a cardinal, I cannot make out. The cross-keys on the bishop’s shield are the arms of the city of Ratisbon.

The following shields are borne by angels, who appear above the battlements of a wall in the lower compartment of folio 4, forming the eighth subject in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration.

On these I have nothing to remark further than that the double-headed eagle is the arms of the German empire. The other three I leave to be deciphered by others. The second, with an indented chief, and something like a rose in the field, will be found, I am inclined to think, to be the arms of some town or city in Wirtemberg or Alsace. I give the three inscriptions here, not that they are likely to throw any light on the subject, but because the third has not hitherto been deciphered. They are all from the IVth chapter of the Song of Solomon. The first is from verse 12: “_Ortus conclusus est soror, mea sposa; ortus conclusus, fons signatus_:” in our translation of the Bible: “A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.” The second is from verse 15: “_Fons ortorum, puteus aquarum vivencium quæ fluunt impetu de Lybano_:” in our Bible: “A fountain of gardens, a well of living waters, and streams from Lebanon.” The third is from verse 16: “_Surge Aquilo; veni Auster, perfla ortum et fluant aromata illius_:” in our Bible: “Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out.”

In the upper division of folio 15, which is the twenty-ninth subject in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration, the above shields occur. They are suspended on the walls of a tower, which is represented by an inscription as “the armoury whereon hang a thousand bucklers, all shields of mighty men.”[II-49]

[Footnote II-49: Song of Solomon, chap. iv. verse 4.]

On the first four I shall make no remark beyond calling the attention of those skilled in German heraldry to the remarkable charge in the first shield, which appears something like a cray-fish. The sixth, “two trouts hauriant and addorsed,” is one of the quarterings of the house of Wirtemberg as lords of Mompelgard. The seventh is charged with three crowns, the arms of the city of Cologne. The charge of the eighth I take to be three cinquefoils, which are one of the quarterings of the family of Aremberg. The cross-keys in the ninth are the arms of the city of Ratisbon.

The four following shields occur in the lower division of folio 15. They are borne by men in armour standing by the side of a bed. On a scroll is the following inscription, from the 7th and 8th verses of the third chapter of Solomon’s Song. “_En lectulum Salomonis sexaginta fortes ambiunt, omnes tenentes gladios_:” in our Bible: “Behold his bed, which is Solomon’s; three score valiant men are about it . . . . . they all hold swords.”

The first three of the shields on the following page I shall leave to be assigned by others. The fourth, which is charged with a rose, was the arms of Hagenau, a town in Alsace.

As so little is known respecting the country where, and the precise time when, the principal block-books appeared,--of which the History of the Virgin is one,--I think every particular, however trifling, which may be likely to afford even a gleam of light, deserving of notice. It is for this reason that I have given the different shields contained in this and the preceding pages; not in the belief that I have made any important discovery, or established any considerable facts; but with the desire of directing to this subject the attention of others, whose further inquiries and comparisons may perhaps establish such a perfect identity between the arms of a particular district, and those contained in the volume, as may determine the probable locality of the place where it was executed. The coincidences which I have noticed were not sought for. Happening to be turning over Sebastian Munster’s Cosmography when a copy of the History of the Virgin was before me, I observed that the two fish in the arms of the Counts of Wirtemberg,[II-50] and those in the 15th folio of the History, were the same. The other instances of correspondence were also discovered without search, from having occasionally, in tracing the progress of wood engraving, to refer to Merian’s Topographia.

[Footnote II-50: Those arms are to be seen in Sebastiana Munsteri
Cosmographia, cap. De Regione Wirtenbergensi, p. 592. Folio,
Basiliæ, apud Henrichum Petri, 1554.]

Considering the thickness of the paper on which the block-books are printed,--if I may apply this term to them,--and the thin-bodied ink which has been used. I am at a loss to conceive how the early wood-engravers have contrived to take off their impressions so correctly; for in all the block-books which I have seen, where friction has evidently been the means employed to obtain the impression, I have only noticed two subjects in which the lines appeared double in consequence of the shifting of the paper. From the want of body in the ink, which appears in the Apocalypse to have been little more than water-colour, it is not likely the paper could be used in a damp state, otherwise the ink would run or spread; and, even if this difficulty did not exist, the paper in a damp state could not have borne the excessive rubbing which it appears to have received in order to obtain the impression.[II-51] Even with such printer’s ink as is used in the present day,--which being tenacious, renders the paper in taking an impression by means of friction much less liable to slip or shift,--it would be difficult to obtain clear impressions on thick paper from blocks the size of those which form each page of the Apocalypse, or the History of the Virgin.

[Footnote II-51: The backs of many of the old wood-cuts which have
been taken by means of friction, still appear bright in
consequence of the rubbing which the paper has sustained in order
to obtain the impression. They would not have this appearance if
the paper had been used in a damp state.]

Mr. Ottley, however, states that no less than two pages of the History of the Virgin have been engraved on the same block. His observations on this subject are as follows: “Upon first viewing this work, I was of opinion that each of the designs contained in it was engraved upon a separate block of wood: but, upon a more careful examination, I have discovered that the contents of each two pages--that is, four subjects--were engraved on the same block. The number of wooden blocks, therefore, from which the whole was printed, was only eight. This is proved in the first two pages of the copy before me;[II-52] where, near the bottom of the two upper subjects, the block appears to have been broken in two, in a horizontal direction,--after it was engraved,--and joined together again; although not with such exactness but that the traces of the operation clearly show themselves. The traces of a similar accident are still more apparent in the last block, containing the Nos. 29, 30, 31, 32. The whole work was, therefore, printed on eight sheets of paper from the same number of engraved blocks, the first four subjects being printed from the same block upon the same sheet,--and so on with the rest; and, indeed, in Lord Spencer’s copy, each sheet, being mounted upon a guard, distinctly shows itself entire.”[II-53]

[Footnote II-52: This must have been a copy of that which Heineken
calls the second edition; no such appearances of a fracture or
joining are to be seen in the first.]

[Footnote II-53: Inquiry, p. 142.]

The appearance of a corresponding fracture in two adjacent pages would certainly render it likely that both were engraved on the same block; though I should like to have an opportunity of satisfying myself by inspection whether such appearances are really occasioned by a fracture or not; for it is rather singular that such appearances should be observable on the _first_ and the _last_ blocks only. I always reluctantly speculate, except on something like sufficient grounds; but as I have not seen a copy of the edition to which Mr. Ottley refers, I beg to ask if the traces of supposed fracture in the last two pages do not correspond with those in the first two? and if so, would it not be equally reasonable to infer that eight subjects instead of four were engraved on the same block? A block containing only two pages would be about seventeen inches by ten, allowing for inner margins; and to obtain clear impressions from it by means of friction, on dry thick paper, and with mere water-colour ink, would be a task of such difficulty that I cannot conceive how it could be performed. No traces of points by which the paper might be kept steady on the block are perceptible; and I unhesitatingly assert that no wood-engraver of the present day could by means of friction take clear impressions from such a block on equally thick paper, and using mere distemper instead of printer’s ink. As the impressions in the History of the Virgin have unquestionably been taken by means of friction, it is evident to me that if the blocks were of the size that Mr. Ottley supposes, the old wood-engravers, who did not use a press, must have resorted to some contrivance to keep the paper steady, with which we are now unacquainted.

Heineken describes an edition of the Apocalypse consisting of forty-eight leaves, with cuts on one side only, which, when bound, form a volume of three “_gatherings_,” or collections, each containing sixteen leaves. Each of these gatherings is formed by eight folio sheets folded in the middle, and placed one within the other, so that the cuts are worked off in the following manner: On the outer sheet of the gathering, forming the first and the sixteenth leaf, the first and the sixteenth cuts are impressed, so that when the sheet is folded they face each other, and the first and the last pages are left blank. In a similar manner the 2nd and 15th; the 3d and 14th; the 4th and 13th; the 5th and 12th; the 6th and 11th; the 7th and 10th, and the 8th and 9th, are, each pair respectively, impressed on the same side of the same sheet. These sheets when folded for binding are then placed in such a manner that the first is opposite the second; the third opposite the fourth, and so on throughout the whole sixteen. Being arranged in this manner, two cuts and two blank pages occur alternately. The reason for this mode of arrangement was, that the blank pages might be pasted together, and the cuts thus appear as if one were impressed on the back of another. A familiar illustration of this mode of folding, adopted by the early wood-engravers before they were accustomed to impress their cuts on both sides of a leaf, is afforded by forming a sheet of paper into a little book of sixteen leaves, and numbering the second and third pages 1 and 2, leaving two pages blank; then numbering the fifth and sixth 3 and 4, and so to No. 16, which will stand opposite to No. 15, and have its back, forming the outer page of the gathering, unimpressed.